Go to Kooka's Reviews
- Add a comment
- Go to X-MEN THE LAST STAND
Madem
My main problem, with the first X-Men film was the
plot. I just didn't like the device, but since that played second fiddle to get
Wolverine on the team and building up his relationship with the other team
members so I was able to over look such a weak point. As with the comics, the
science of the movies is very screwed up and just makes no sense. you have to
over look the bad science of comicbooks and comicbooks made into movies if you
wish to sit back and enjoy the story.
The second one I felt was very strong all through
out and really had nothing that bothered me. It had a worthy story and some
great moments.
I have also feel the casting was good and worked.
I have had no problem with the age of Magneto or his looks (Personally the idea
of him being handsome or not is unimportant to me since for the most part I am a
horrible judge as to what men are handsome). He has been played out really well
and as a believable villain who very much thinks he is doing what is
best.
As for Storm, I think a big part of that is because
she got pushed back to being a background character. This has been remedied in
X-Men three, where she gets a bigger role and gets to be much more active.
Berry was upset with the role herself and wanted a bigger part of X-Men
3.
I really do not feel the X-Men movies were mediocre. They
could have been better, no doubt about that. But there were good enough.
Better than a lot of the crap that keeps coming out and getting huge
audiences.
From the sounds of it I am going to guess that this
is more personal for you than a lot of other movies. It sounds like you are a
big fan and felt let down and so that kind of builds up on your dislike of the
movie and desire to find more flaws with it. I've seen this befo mediocrity
re.
Obviously we have differing opinions on this one.
But that is how the universe works. We can not all enjoy the same things in the
same way.
Trust me, when I see a bad movie I go off about it
and often drive my wife crazy talking about it. I have upset people greatly
because I was unable to stop picking a movie apart. I am really good at picking
apart bad movies.
posted by
kooka_lives
on
May 29, 2006
at
7:15 AM
| |
reply
A couple quick points:
~ I didn't have a problem with Magneto being old. However, there are degrees of old (obviously) and thus, I said McKellan was too old. Nor is he particularly attractive for an older man. Richard Gere, had he been willing to accept the part, would have been perfect.
~ The Storm of the comics has a strength, a maturity and a dignity that Halle Berry simply does not.
Beyond all that, the X-Men movies, quite frankly, just aren't very good (from a cinematic standpoint) and pale in comparison to the Spiderman versions (or, for that matter, Batman Begins). Sadly, many action movie audiences seem to have an appallingly high tolerance for mediocrity.
"Underemployed film critic."
posted by
Mademoiselle
on
May 28, 2006
at
11:01 PM
| |
reply
Madem
I hated X-men:Evolution. I thought it was a stupid
take on it all and just did not work for me in the least. I feel the movies
have done a much better job of retelling the X-men than that cartoon ever
did.
I felt they did a great job with the human
element. Especially X-Men 2. Although the opening for the first one was perfect
and created a strong human element, giving us a great look at how Magneto ends
up being who he is. In part 3 we get some great insight to Magneto and Prof. X's
friendship.
There are strong human elements in these
movies.
As for the character.
How old do you think Magneto is? He reached
puberty in WWII. He is not going to be young. That would have really made no
sense at all. In the comics you can get them old and keep them with smoother
faces and such, but for the movie the age of Magneto just makes sense. And even
then he is looking good for his age.
Storm too girly? What? She wore a tank top that
showed off her bosom for how long in the comics? You might like her better in
part 3 though, since she get a much better role and ends up team
leader.
I had no problem with Nightcrawler (How could they
have changed him to make him better?) or Jean, since I understood why they made
her a doctor and needed to change the character a little.
As for Rogue and Iceman, I can figure out somewhat
why those changes were made, but that is the kind of thing that happens. They
did not fit their comicbook counter parts. Rouge would have just taken too long
and if you look at the story they came up with for the first movie you can see
why they couldn't not follow the comics and instead made her the Wolverine
sidekick character. Iceman, they just needed the stereotypical 'good looking'
boy in order to create the romance. Don't know why they picked him, although he
does some cool stuff in part 3.
posted by
kooka_lives
on
May 28, 2006
at
7:24 PM
| |
reply
I didn't dislike them ... I hated them.
Granted, the number of characters/complexity of the storylines makes X-men much harder to translate than, say, Spiderman.
Thus, I would have simplified the story, ala X-Men: Evolution (the best of the cartoon versions), to focus more on the human element (i.e. struggle to be accepted + live normally) and less on the superpowers ... which, of course, is the same formula that made Spiderman 2 the Citizen Kane of superhero movies.
I thought the casting was all wrong, too. Iceman, for instance, is a dork. Also, Storm's too girly, Magneto's too old, Nightcrawler's makeup's too obvious, Jean's too something and the movie Rogue (my favorite character) is a complete abomination.
Of course, what difference does it make? Since Wolverine and (to a lesser extent) Xavier are, obviously, the only team members the screenwriters cared about, anyway?
"Happy first official day of summer!"
posted by
Mademoiselle
on
May 27, 2006
at
10:36 AM
| |
reply
ariel
You've not gone to the movies in forty years?
I love the experience of going to the movies too much to go more than a
few months without getting to the theater. I would never be able
to handle forty years.
You've missed a lot of good flicks.
If you just watch them on T.V. or home video, they just are not as good.
posted by
kooka_lives
on
May 26, 2006
at
4:25 PM
| |
reply
Madem
You don't like the X-Men movies?
I know they are not like the comics, but a lot of the basics are
there. I feel they have done a fine job with with the
franchise. The actual team is so complex and has such a history,
it would be next to impossible to really do it perfect. I felt
the cartoon from a few years back did a much worse job and the only
excuse there was they were doing for a younger group.
So far I have enjoyed the movies myself.
posted by
kooka_lives
on
May 26, 2006
at
4:16 PM
| |
reply
I would have given the first one a 3 (out of 10) ...
And then, actually was a film critic when I gave the sequel 2 1/2 stars. So I doubt I'll even bother to see this one. I may rent it though.
The comic deserved so much better than this.
"Closet X-nerd."
posted by
Mademoiselle
on
May 26, 2006
at
2:01 PM
| |
reply
Kooka
Yep, time sure flies when you're havin' fun. I haven't been to the flicks for over forty years.
posted by
ariel70
on
May 26, 2006
at
11:15 AM
| |
reply
Copy (or write down) this comment's web address (URL), which is:
Next, go to the email or web page where you want to link to this comment, and paste
(or type) the web address.
